While I do believe that the Ardanes pre-date the rede, I think were talking months or years, not centuries or millennia.

While some of the conceptual issues contained therein might well have been passed down from old texts / stories / other ephemera, I believe, personally, that this codification isn't all that old.

That stipulated, I don't believe it renders the list invalid.

One of the reasons this thread is here is that, as was mentioned, most of the exegetical writing I have read is, indeed, oathbound. There are some explanations out there, true, but 95% of the ones I have read...(MANY!)....follow that same lack of understanding down the road to blind following that you mentioned as an occurrence in nearly ALL faiths. And yet others are driven by agenda-tainted "scholars". Even some of the translations have been worded to either support or detract the position of the authors'.

Logged

How soon IS now and who IS John Galt?

FireWillow

For the record I am a dedicant. I didn't finish reading the Ardanes but it seems to be a little...off. From what little I know, it doesn't seem to really fit into wicca. I'm not sure but I wanted to know so please teach me about this.

Off? Doesn't fit into Wicca?

My friend, these laws define Wicca. I believe they were, for the greater part, written by the founder of Wicca himself. Perhaps they don't fit into your belief system, which, given your opinion, likely isn't Wicca. But Wicca they are.

FireWillow

Wait, I just read the notes on the Old Laws, so that puts everything into perspective a little more. The Old Laws are certainly an interesting read. I think it's interesting that this document exists, and while it certainly gives an interesting historical perspective, a couple of things made me wonder (besides the above post). For example:

...if the man is the 'master' how did they reconcile that with the High Priestess being the nominal head of the Coven? I realize that this document is intended to be from the older times and perhaps based on historically handed down information; it still made me go 'huh'.

Not for nothing ... but ... if you don't understand the laws of old and the ideas contained within them can you really, honestly, say that you're Wiccan ? These are the tenets of the faith.

It's one thing to understand your history and perhaps disagree on a point or two. That puts you into the category of one of the trads that branched off from the original Gardenarian way much the same way as the protestant faiths branched off from original Christianity. There's still enough of " The Essense " of the faith left to call it Wicca or Christianity. There comes a point though that things become so watered down that it becomes something different. Something not at all wicca ....

IMO that's the case with a lot of modern day wiccans. They only have a superficial understanding of the faith. If something comes along to suggest that Wicca isn't quite what they think it is ? ... well ... they are quite apt to dismiss it and go on their merry way.

This isn't isolated to Wicca. I've met plenty of lifelong Christians that don't understand the first thing about the spiritual path they claim to follow. Probably the same can be said of any religion ....

That's why I asked the questions - I knew I'd get more questions in return to think about I'm learning how this works - someone asks a question, more people come back with more questions, and that makes me go hunting so I can learn more I'm not ready to call myself Wiccan yet simply because I don't believe I have enough understanding to do so - I'm learning and finding out if Wicca is for me Threads like this are actually incredibly helpful.

Quote from: C_A

I am going to give you clues here. Work on it, m'kay?

A) Think of it in the context of ONE POSITION...

B) No. But think of BALANCE.

Balance, check. Going digging

Quote from: FireWillow

You may wish to look at alternate definitions of the term 'master.'

I can see I will have my reading cut out for me. Yay!

Logged

"The world's the same, mate. There's just less in it." ~Captain Jack Sparrow.

My friend, these laws define Wicca. I believe they were, for the greater part, written by the founder of Wicca himself. Perhaps they don't fit into your belief system, which, given your opinion, likely isn't Wicca. But Wicca they are.

I'm very sorry FW and C_A. I did say I didn't finish reading them..It makes more sense now. I can't say I fully understand them but I'm still just trying to learn as much as I can. Seeking path indeed. I plan on over-turning every stone and unearthing every skeleton. I'm still young and my path just begun really. This october will mark just one year since I began studying. You say I'm off to a relatively good start right? I'm glad my searching has been fruitful thus far and I will continue to study and learn as much as I can. Also Thank you, this site is a HUGE help and you guys really help with your nudges.

Logged

I was gonna participate in the Clairvoyants' meeting, but it was cancelled due to unforseen events.

I will post a question once I can formulate it properly; I'm still thinking about all the things I've read. It's like information overload I have to filter it before I can continue. These links were just very interesting to me so I thought I'd post them while I was ruminating.

Also FW I looked up every possible definition of Master (both noun and verb) and while I could see it being used in the sense of 'learning' instead of 'ruling' the other... the second line 5. So should the Wicca love the gods by being mastered by them. still seems to point to one being 'ruled' by the gods, hence to the man being the 'ruler' or 'master' in the most common sense of the word. Personally I'd prefer the learning angle, as a man loving a woman by learning all about her (and one would hope the reverse would also be true) but the second line cannot be changed into So should the Wicca love the gods by learning of them because it states "being mastered by them" which implies being ruled by the gods (because why would we love the gods by the gods learning about us?). I know these are just two lines in the Ardanes but I just felt very (negatively) strongly about them. I'm trying to understand, so bear with me as I ramble.

As for the issue of balance, I can understand that it would be balanced to have a man teach a woman and vice versa - because the God and Goddess are of that dual nature, both halves of the same whole. I think it was the wording of the Ardanes in this case that threw me off more than anything else.

Logged

"The world's the same, mate. There's just less in it." ~Captain Jack Sparrow.

FireWillow

Also FW I looked up every possible definition of Master (both noun and verb) and while I could see it being used in the sense of 'learning' instead of 'ruling' the other... the second line 5. So should the Wicca love the gods by being mastered by them. still seems to point to one being 'ruled' by the gods, hence to the man being the 'ruler' or 'master' in the most common sense of the word. Personally I'd prefer the learning angle, as a man loving a woman by learning all about her (and one would hope the reverse would also be true) but the second line cannot be changed into So should the Wicca love the gods by learning of them because it states "being mastered by them" which implies being ruled by the gods (because why would we love the gods by the gods learning about us?). I know these are just two lines in the Ardanes but I just felt very (negatively) strongly about them. I'm trying to understand, so bear with me as I ramble.

So you are interpreting this as Wiccans love the gods by being ruled by them? How does that make sense? Being ruled or dominated doesn't affect love from me. Does it from you?

Another hint: Look up 'mastery' and see if that puts a better spin on this for you...

So you are interpreting this as Wiccans love the gods by being ruled by them? How does that make sense? Being ruled or dominated doesn't affect love from me. Does it from you?

Another hint: Look up 'mastery' and see if that puts a better spin on this for you...

It doesn't affect love from me either; however I'm reading the line and it still says "So should the Wicca love the gods by being mastered by them". Although thinking further of it I think an interpretation could be that we show our love for the gods by following their laws (ie An it harm none, do as ye will, for starters). Mastery has several connotations - again basically breaking down into 'expert skill or knowledge', 'command or grasp (of a subject)' and 'the state of being master; power of command or control'. Since I don't believe that the gods control us, as we have free will, and are able to make choices in our lives, whether for good or ill, that's where this particular tenet of the Ardanes is a stumbling block for me. If the line were "So should the Wicca love the gods by mastering them" it would be much easier to interpret this line as "by having expert skill or knowledge of the gods" or "command/grasp of the gods" by understanding how they affect us in our daily lives. From what I've read of Wiccan belief so far, Deity is held to be within everyone and everything of nature, both god and goddess, good and bad, because it's about balance. Perhaps this law then means that we show our love for the gods by being in control of ourselves and our actions? Since the gods are part of us. That would be an interpretation I could be comfortable with.

Logged

"The world's the same, mate. There's just less in it." ~Captain Jack Sparrow.

FireWillow

It doesn't affect love from me either; however I'm reading the line and it still says "So should the Wicca love the gods by being mastered by them". Although thinking further of it I think an interpretation could be that we show our love for the gods by following their laws (ie An it harm none, do as ye will, for starters). Mastery has several connotations - again basically breaking down into 'expert skill or knowledge', 'command or grasp (of a subject)' and 'the state of being master; power of command or control'. Since I don't believe that the gods control us, as we have free will, and are able to make choices in our lives, whether for good or ill, that's where this particular tenet of the Ardanes is a stumbling block for me. If the line were "So should the Wicca love the gods by mastering them" it would be much easier to interpret this line as "by having expert skill or knowledge of the gods" or "command/grasp of the gods" by understanding how they affect us in our daily lives. From what I've read of Wiccan belief so far, Deity is held to be within everyone and everything of nature, both god and goddess, good and bad, because it's about balance. Perhaps this law then means that we show our love for the gods by being in control of ourselves and our actions? Since the gods are part of us. That would be an interpretation I could be comfortable with.

Bravo! You have pointed yourself in the right direction! Keep digging!